9911796707
TMI Blog1989 (9) TMI 152X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ons and disallowances sustained by the CIT(A) have further been challenged before the Appellate Tribunal. 3. The first ground of appeal pertains to trading addition of Rs. 30,621. The ITO during the course of examination of accounts found that in the "Pan Mouri" account average purchase of last lot was Rs. 335.44 per bag whereas average sale per bag on 9th April, 1984 came to Rs. 442.12. The cl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... his way the ITO added sum of Rs. 30,621. The assessee challenged the order in appeal but remained unsuccessful. Hence, this appeal. 4. We have considered rival submissions. of the parties and have also examined the material on record. The CIT(A) noted various decisions cited on behalf of the assessee that the absence of stock register could not attract proviso to s. 145(1) but observed that boo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... se, the entire book results relating to turnover of about Rs. 1 crore has been rejected and gross profit rate of 5. 75 per cent was applied against 5.3 per cent shown by the assessee. We are of view that on facts no case for rejection of trading result under proviso to s. 145(1) has been made. We, therefore, direct that trading addition made in this case be deleted. 5. The next ground pertains ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... atio of the said decision can no longer be called to help the assessee. But the matter does not rest there. It will still have to be seen whether the first proviso to s. 43B (introduced by the Finance Act, 1989, w.e.f. 1st April, 1988) is applicable to this case. Here, a couple of points suggest themselves. First, the case has proceeded before both the lower authorities on the basis of the main pa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ly apply to this case in hand and the matter is remitted back to the CIT(A) for carrying out the above directions. 6. Next ground pertains to disallowance of Rs. 50,000 claimed as travelling and sumptuary allowance paid to the partners. This issue was heard along with ITA 260 (Ctk) of 1986 in the case of Pushraj Bijoykumar. For the reasons detailed in the order disposing of the above appeal we ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
